I totally disagree that "we'll make it work" is a verbal RSVP in the positive. Talk about stretching the English language until it no longer has no meaning, that's it right there. "Make it work" does not under any guise of normal conversation translate to "we well absolutely attend both your events" especially when its paired with "the date doesn't really work for us" as it was. "Make it work" could easily mean we'll attend one event but not the other, or we'll take you out to dinner some other time, or we'll send a written toast to be read to you. To me "make it work" = "we'll work something out" and the solution is not going to be the original request (which in this case was attend both events), its the offering of a compromise, not an affirmative RSVP.

Especially since we don't know the full conversation. Maybe BIL and FSIL live out of town and are coming back 'home' for this party, the original email/conversations could have been something like "we'll be in town for an engagement party the weekend of Saturday May 11 and then our wedding will be the following year on Sunday May 11..." and the LW and her DH had plans to go away for the weekend, so the "make it work" comment easily could have meant "we'll put off leaving until Saturday morning and travel on our anniversary so we can see you Friday night when you get to town".

Without knowing exactly what the DH was responding to, we cannot make absolute conclusions on what his response was exactly referencing.

Every time that I read this thread, I wonder if LW and her DH face consequences for missing these events - why do BIL and his DF not face consequences for their scheduling conflicts.

I think they don't because they can plan their wedding for a date that is convenient for them. It is impractical to take everyone's schedule into account to the point where you are considering relatives' anniversaries, birthdays, and camp schedules.

If someone chooses not to attend, the reason is going to be weighed as reasonable or unreasonable by others.

Every time that I read this thread, I wonder if LW and her DH face consequences for missing these events - why do BIL and his DF not face consequences for their scheduling conflicts.

I think they don't because they can plan their wedding for a date that is convenient for them. It is impractical to take everyone's schedule into account to the point where you are considering relatives' anniversaries, birthdays, etc.

They can do that - but that does not mean they don't have consequences either in the fact that those dates might not be convenient to everyone invited - including close relatives or that their might not be relationship consequences for making LW and DIL for go their own celebration to attend these events. The LW and her DH might well resent their first anniversary being co-opted for an engagement party, forcing them to choose between pissing off someone ( by non attendence) or forgoing their own celebration and the lifelong memories that go along with it. I know of no one who did not do something for their first anniversary and who did not cherish those memories for ever. It seems to me that if you are going to deny someone the opportunity to celebrate their own event on the day it happened, you get to deal with the consequence of their resentment - possibly enough of it to affect the relationship forever.

I don't think "we'll make itt work" is a 100% commitment but it does seem it is. I do think that the brother needs to address it asap if they don't plan to attend. Just say "sorry, I was just informed wife made plans". Maybe play it off like he was surprised by his wife. Sure it is dishonest but it would be hard to say to someone's face that you don't want to go to the event on principal that it the same as your wedding date.

For the wedding I would just go just because the absence of the brother and SIL would probably be talked about.

For the record, engagement parties in my area are gift giving events. I only dislike them because I am tired of the way weddings are going with more and more events. It also has become the need to gift at most of these events, the engagement party, the social, the shower, the stag/stagette, the wedding, it seems too much.

Every time that I read this thread, I wonder if LW and her DH face consequences for missing these events - why do BIL and his DF not face consequences for their scheduling conflicts.

Well, LW is alteady miffed and is complaining to Prudence (maybe others?), it sounds like the won't have LW or DH at their engagement party and even attending the wedding is not certain. So there seem to be some pretty steep consequences already for the act of choosing the wedding date they wanted and/or that seemed to work best overall.

Every time that I read this thread, I wonder if LW and her DH face consequences for missing these events - why do BIL and his DF not face consequences for their scheduling conflicts.

Well, LW is alteady miffed and is complaining to Prudence (maybe others?), it sounds like the won't have LW or DH at their engagement party and even attending the wedding is not certain. So there seem to be some pretty steep consequences already for the act of choosing the wedding date they wanted and/or that seemed to work best overall.

And most people seem to be siding with the BIL, not understanding that the LW has a right to be miffed. She no longer has the right to even feel miffed with out being told that she needs to suck up and get over it. If they do what they want for their own even ---that works best for them---- they are in the wrong, but the BIL and his DF come out smelling like roses. It seems to me that BIL and DF need to be as understanding as they are asking LW to be and suck it up if LW and DH do "what works best for them". after all the BIL and DF don't "own the date" either.

But the difference is that we don't know yhat they will be miffed.LW plans to do her thing on her fist anniversary and she is still miffed. That I don't get at all. She doezn't report flack from the HC - don't know if they know or if they are being gracious abput other people making tjeir own decisions. It might be a bit different if she wrote in that they wouldn't be attending bit she was happy for them and hoped they enjoyed their party but she doesn't. She wants to do what she wants but resents when they do what they want. So yeah, I thinl there is a stinky attitude coming off of her.

But to me the difference is that most of the people reading the letter refuse to acknowledge that LW should have any feelings at all about this, or that the BIL and Df should experience anything but exactly what they want on "their" days - not one but two consecutive years of celebrating on this other couple's anniversary. And the one being vilified is the one who had the plans first. Since the LW was married on that day first, they had plans for at least their first anniversary first. Not the BIL and DF.

BIL and DF can do what they want but the don't get to escape relationship consequences either.

And if we don't know if the BIL and DF will be, miffed - we also don't know that they won't. And it's been pointed out several times that if they skip things in favour of their own events that they will be talked about behind their backs for doing so. Personally if I am going to extend the understand that BIL and DF are "doing what works best for them" then I wil equally grant that understanding to LW and DH. Just because BIL and DF can do something, does not mean it's going to work for everyone around them, even their immediate family.

I just can't get past the idea that it would be impossible, or even an imposition, to attend my brother's wedding on my second wedding anniversary. It just isn't a god enough reason, in my opinion.

It wouldn't be if they had not also scheduled an event that it seems the LW must attend on the LW's first anniversary. It's the combination that really sets my hinky meter off. And that makes me really feel for the LW.

I just can't get past the idea that it would be impossible, or even an imposition, to attend my brother's wedding on my second wedding anniversary. It just isn't a god enough reason, in my opinion.

It wouldn't be if they had not also scheduled an event that it seems the LW must attend on the LW's first anniversary. It's the combination that really sets my hinky meter off. And that makes me really feel for the LW.

See, I don't see how you say they come off smelling like roses when they are apparently suspect by liking a date that was perfectly acceptable for LW/DH to like. If the firs couple chose it then maybe the second couple had an equally good reason for choosing it. Instead, they are suspicious for doing so.

I just can't get past the idea that it would be impossible, or even an imposition, to attend my brother's wedding on my second wedding anniversary. It just isn't a god enough reason, in my opinion.

It wouldn't be if they had not also scheduled an event that it seems the LW must attend on the LW's first anniversary. It's the combination that really sets my hinky meter off. And that makes me really feel for the LW.

To me the second couple by way claiming it for the year before their wedding and the year of... give up any leeway they could have had from me. People here are saying that the first couple can only expect to have that day once. But the second couple is taking it twice and that is honky dory - and the first date is not even their wedding date. So if the second couple is ok to take the date twice, the first couple certainly See, I don't see how you say they come off smelling like roses when they are apparently suspect by liking a date that was perfectly acceptable for LW/DH to like. If the firs couple chose it then maybe the second couple had an equally good reason for choosing it. Instead, they are suspicious for doing so.

People have said that the first couple only gets the day once - but the second couple is taking it twice, one year before their wedding even occurs and the first couple is expected to put aside their plans for their day, suck it up and attend the second couple's party in lieu of their own celebration. If the first couple gets the day only once, why then it it ok for the second couple to expect it for two years? THe second couple may well have an attachment to that date, but that does not over ride that someone else may be celebrating their own events that day, too. And that those other people may well have feelings about being told that they are expected to put aside their celebration ( planned first because their wedding has already taken place so the plan for the first anniversary was there if not formalized) and attend the second couple's. Consequences go both ways. If the first couple is risking something by not attending the second couple's events, it needs to be realized that the resentment that is felt by being pressured to go to avoid the consequences from the family, and the second couple, may well poison the relationship from the first couple's perspective.

If the first couple gets the day only once, why then it it ok for the second couple to expect it for two years?

I think this is a fair question. I still don't think LW has any right to be in a snit about the whole thing. They are fine to say, "We already have plans for the day/weekend of your engagement party, sorry! Yeah... we made them well in advance since it's our first anniversary. We'll be thinking fondly of you guys!"

As for the wedding, geez, just go. The whole "Well... we'll make it work if this is the only thing possible" seems really PA to me. Either say you can't go and don't apologize, or go without becoming the anniversary-missing-martyrs.